Re: Your first "linguistic" memory



Brian M. Scott wrote:
Ruud Harmsen wrote in sci.lang:

"Klaus Nomi" <rossclark@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: in sci.lang:
There's no /i/ in "team", but there is an /i/ in "pickles".

No, team has [i:], pickles has [I]. You got your symbols wrong.

On the contrary: using Peter's preferred phonemic notation,
<team> is /tiym/, which does not contain a phoneme /i/, and
<pickles> is /piklz/ or /pik@lz/, which does.

Using a more British style, the first half of the statement is
still correct -- the phoneme is /i:/, not /i/ -- but the second
isn't, because the phoneme is /I/. Your square brackets are
completely irrelevant.

Peter also says: Anglos perceive/ transcribe vowel phonemes by
tenseness and not length. In Malayali* English, "eat" is [i:t], "it" is
[it] and "pit" is [pIt]. The first two have identically short vowels
whereas the last two have identically tense vowels. So, would he and
you, when using Kirshenbaum's notation, transcribe the middle one as
/it/ rather than /It/?

* This gives a good description of where a Malayali's short i's are lax
and where they are tense:
http://www.languageinindia.com/sep2002/chap2.html

.